BuzzerBeater Forums

Have you read my previous posts?I picked up a sixth man potential,a 19 years old sixth man potential it's completely useless nowadays...but if i pick up a 5 ball star rating,i expected to have at least a useful player,also if he is old and has low potential,your example shows thatthe draft has to be less randomatic to be an enjoyable part of this game

It's out of any sense that a five ball rating can go from "the future best player in the BB world" to "a player that you have to fire one minute after the draft"

Last edited by Steve Karenn at 3/27/2010 9:32:35 AM

I did some research on the draft. From what I found out was that
5* Rating grantees salary of 3,7k+
which for me is pretty much the lowest trainable salary. Below that, in most of the cases you can just fire the guy (unless he has 9, 10 potential and the right hight).

With the potential balls it seems it more or less like this:
5* 10, 9,
4* 8, 7
3* 6, 5
2* 4, 3
1* 2, 1, 0

Player with a 3* potential is a decent choice for guards unless u are in the top 2 divisions of your country. 4* is sufficient for inside players. I've trained guards with star potential. I used most of the time 2 position training and in most cases by the time the guy reaches his potential he is already 23 years old and not worth training. The rush for potential is a little bit exaggerated and overpriced. Players with 9-10 potential are in most cases needed only in the top 2 divisions or for those people that want to have a player on the NT or U21 team. All of my trainees came from the draft. Some drafts were awful but I can blame the system itself as I've never had a pick better than 12th. In season 10 draft in my league there where 5 guys with salary 4k+ of who only one was 18 with a decent potential. In this draft we had 11 guys with 4k+ salary of who 4 had salary of 5,5k+. I'm not gonna complain about that distribution. After all not every draft in NBA has brought superstars into the game.

The thing I would change in draft is that we receive as many points as we have paid for and we "discover" each player and decide if we want to waste second point to get his potential or not. In that manner we could only blame our luck in case we wasted all of our points on trainable guys. Also I agree that the 19 year olds should be given a bit higher skill sets since thats why they stayed in college one year longer.

I think that with that 2 modifications the draft system would be much better.

5 stars for match rating...sigh

i can't let the chunks have the last word on a thread he started -- but, la fou, i've been thinking . . .

what if we had something like what i understand the nfl has -- a collective scouting of a group of rookies. the way i envision this working is teams would pay to look -- say $50,000 -- and then get all the available information about all the rookies. (this could be subject to further development -- maybe the same balls system, ranking, box scores, or maybe some specific skills, height --)

then -- and this is the idea -- we would have a league-wide Dutch auction -- each team would offer silent, secret bids on the player(s) of their dreams -- i could see each team bidding on up to three players, say -- they could offer bids on each of the players, but rank their priority. this draft would accomplish much:

1) teams could opt in or out of the draft -- increasing the range of management tactics
2) teams could look for specific players to fit their needs
3) giving sufficient clues for a reasonable idea of the player's abilities and potential would remove or certainly reduce the random / gambling factor
4) strong rookies would no longer be free money for the undeserving, but would be fairly valued from the beginning. or, to put it another way, rookies would be more accurately valued before they hit the TL
5) it would be challenging to come up with a bid that both wins a player and does not overpay
6) it would further complicate finances, as teams would have to plan for the bids

downside, or adverse changes:
1) teams lose their draft advantage currently gained now by losing. i don't see this as deal breaker, because they could plan for spending big bucks on a draft choice.
2) multiple bids could be a hassle -- maybe teams could have a top bid, next bid, third bid, using the same money, but once that money is used, further bids would have to be covered with cash

this would add a bit of active excitement to the weeks between seasons, as we would be looking at other teams and determining what their needs might be, their bids, etc.

would more successful teams not have more money during the season as well, and be able to afford to spend the extra on the scouting? right now, more successful teams have more money and can buy better players on the TL than weaker teams -- i don't see the difference. i think it is safe to say in bb it is always better to be a strong than weak team.

and as far as improving weaker teams, as it now stands, the weaker team(s) may or may not get the best player(s) available, thanks to random chance. as it now stands, my experience has shown me that weak teams and strong teams alike kiss off the draft more or less (i am basing this on the league averages on the team finances page). and after division v, a draft choice is not going to salvage a team headed for relegation anyway -- drafts are all about the future two or three seasons down the line.

i suppose i am saying the draft as now constituted does not accomplish the purpose of re-balancing league competition. my suggestion does make the process a bit more rational and predictably useful. and rich teams have as much chance at that rare 18-year old HOF player during the draft as on the TL.

Simply put, and for the 100th time, the draft is BORING AS HELL. You dont' do ANYTHING at all for 99.999% of the season.

The entire draft experience is made up of the following:
- deciding how much to invest on the scouts at the beginning of the season (3 minutes maybe?)
- MAYBE changing that once or twice during the season (another 3 minutes maybe?)
- ordering the list of players once it comes out (5 minutes? maybe 10 if you scouted a lot of players?)
- seeing who you ended up with (another two minutes)


Perhaps if the entire process were more interactive and fun during the season then so many people wouldn't completely disregard what should be one of the main aspects of the game.

This is my issue with the draft. And notice that not once did I mention the value of the drafted players in general, and the ones I have been selecting.